This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Stewart Rhodes article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Notice about sources
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Take extra care to use high-quality sources. Material about living persons should not be added when the only sourcing is tabloid journalism; see more information on sources. Never use self-published sources about a living person unless written or published by the subject; see Wikipedia's guidelines on self-published sources and using the subject as a self-published source. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard. If you are connected to one of the subjects of this article and need help, see this page. |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
An item related to this article has been nominated to appear on the
Main Page in the "
In the news" section. You can visit
the nomination to take part in the discussion. Editors are encouraged to update the article with information obtained from
reliable news sources to include recent events. Notice date: 1 December 2022. Please remove this template when the nomination process has concluded, replacing it with Template:ITN talk if appropriate. |
Which categories are appropriate to add re: ethnicity? --- Another Believer ( Talk) 00:44, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
I nominated this. My first time nominating and I may have done it wrong..
/info/en/?search=Wikipedia:In_the_news/Candidates CT55555( talk) 22:51, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
I recall reading that he spent some time working as a gun safety instructor. 174.93.232.191 ( talk) 18:02, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
SPLC is cited as some kind of authority despite being a partisan group with a proven history of lying. This unnecessarily biases this article. 98.97.119.103 ( talk) 18:31, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
An ip editor is trying to add to the lead that the subject is a domestic terrorist. We require multiple, secondary reliable sources to include such a claim. Artificial Nagger ( talk) 08:48, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
Per WP:LEAD and WP:WEIGHT and WP:BALANCE I’m proposing on trimming the “disbarred attorney” and “convicted felon” parts from the lead.
1. Adding “convicted felon” is completely unnecessary as we already have his conviction listed in the lead. Do we need to list it twice? No we don’t, nor should we. In fact, I’m going to trim this now because I can’t fathom any good reason why it belongs twice.
2. “Disbarred attorney” doesn’t really add anything of value to the article, but that’s subjective. But if you look at the available sources, and the body of the article his being an attorney is not very notable, much less being a disbarred attorney, because the sources don’t dwell on this. So why is in the lead? It fails all 3 WP links above.
For both of these, I see only one reason they are being included. That’s to wiki-shame the BLP subject. Not that I give a damn how he may feel, but we as editors are supposed to care about things like maintaining a WP:NPOV. Can someone please explain the support of these two inclusions in the lead? Artificial Nagger ( talk) 15:58, 27 May 2023 (UTC)
The addition of his political affiliation (Libertarian Party and Republican Party) should be considered.
"Rhodes, a self-described Libertarian, testified that he founded the Oath Keepers in 2009 to “reach, change and inspire” people about what rights the Constitution afforded them."
https://edition.cnn.com/2022/11/04/politics/stewart-rhodes-oath-keepers-trial/index.html
"After college, his first political job was supervising interns in Washington, D.C., for Libertarian Ron Paul, then a Republican congressman from Texas. Rhodes subsequently attended Yale Law School, graduating in 2004, and clerked for Arizona Supreme Court Justice Michael D. Ryan. He later volunteered on Paul’s failed 2008 presidential campaign."
https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/individual/elmer-stewart-rhodes
"libertarian former Arizona Supreme Court law clerk"
Moreover, according to The Atlantic, he was "a little-known [right-wing] libertarian blogger."
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2020/11/right-wing-militias-civil-war/616473/ 93.45.229.98 ( talk) 18:07, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
@ Zaathras I agree to some extent with @ Gato63: the right of the federated states to nullify some federal laws is a matter of debate. If the court has held that the law is unconstitutional the federated state can technically prevent the enforcement of the federal law.
An explanatory note should be inserted. The SPLC article explicitly mentions the right to keep and bear arms, ergo a constitutional right. In the hierarchy of sources, federal laws are subordinate to the Constitution. 93.45.229.98 ( talk) 09:43, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
@ Feoffer it would be much more honest if you explained your changes in the talk. 93.45.229.98 ( talk) 07:06, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Stewart Rhodes article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Notice about sources
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Take extra care to use high-quality sources. Material about living persons should not be added when the only sourcing is tabloid journalism; see more information on sources. Never use self-published sources about a living person unless written or published by the subject; see Wikipedia's guidelines on self-published sources and using the subject as a self-published source. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard. If you are connected to one of the subjects of this article and need help, see this page. |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
An item related to this article has been nominated to appear on the
Main Page in the "
In the news" section. You can visit
the nomination to take part in the discussion. Editors are encouraged to update the article with information obtained from
reliable news sources to include recent events. Notice date: 1 December 2022. Please remove this template when the nomination process has concluded, replacing it with Template:ITN talk if appropriate. |
Which categories are appropriate to add re: ethnicity? --- Another Believer ( Talk) 00:44, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
I nominated this. My first time nominating and I may have done it wrong..
/info/en/?search=Wikipedia:In_the_news/Candidates CT55555( talk) 22:51, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
I recall reading that he spent some time working as a gun safety instructor. 174.93.232.191 ( talk) 18:02, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
SPLC is cited as some kind of authority despite being a partisan group with a proven history of lying. This unnecessarily biases this article. 98.97.119.103 ( talk) 18:31, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
An ip editor is trying to add to the lead that the subject is a domestic terrorist. We require multiple, secondary reliable sources to include such a claim. Artificial Nagger ( talk) 08:48, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
Per WP:LEAD and WP:WEIGHT and WP:BALANCE I’m proposing on trimming the “disbarred attorney” and “convicted felon” parts from the lead.
1. Adding “convicted felon” is completely unnecessary as we already have his conviction listed in the lead. Do we need to list it twice? No we don’t, nor should we. In fact, I’m going to trim this now because I can’t fathom any good reason why it belongs twice.
2. “Disbarred attorney” doesn’t really add anything of value to the article, but that’s subjective. But if you look at the available sources, and the body of the article his being an attorney is not very notable, much less being a disbarred attorney, because the sources don’t dwell on this. So why is in the lead? It fails all 3 WP links above.
For both of these, I see only one reason they are being included. That’s to wiki-shame the BLP subject. Not that I give a damn how he may feel, but we as editors are supposed to care about things like maintaining a WP:NPOV. Can someone please explain the support of these two inclusions in the lead? Artificial Nagger ( talk) 15:58, 27 May 2023 (UTC)
The addition of his political affiliation (Libertarian Party and Republican Party) should be considered.
"Rhodes, a self-described Libertarian, testified that he founded the Oath Keepers in 2009 to “reach, change and inspire” people about what rights the Constitution afforded them."
https://edition.cnn.com/2022/11/04/politics/stewart-rhodes-oath-keepers-trial/index.html
"After college, his first political job was supervising interns in Washington, D.C., for Libertarian Ron Paul, then a Republican congressman from Texas. Rhodes subsequently attended Yale Law School, graduating in 2004, and clerked for Arizona Supreme Court Justice Michael D. Ryan. He later volunteered on Paul’s failed 2008 presidential campaign."
https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/individual/elmer-stewart-rhodes
"libertarian former Arizona Supreme Court law clerk"
Moreover, according to The Atlantic, he was "a little-known [right-wing] libertarian blogger."
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2020/11/right-wing-militias-civil-war/616473/ 93.45.229.98 ( talk) 18:07, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
@ Zaathras I agree to some extent with @ Gato63: the right of the federated states to nullify some federal laws is a matter of debate. If the court has held that the law is unconstitutional the federated state can technically prevent the enforcement of the federal law.
An explanatory note should be inserted. The SPLC article explicitly mentions the right to keep and bear arms, ergo a constitutional right. In the hierarchy of sources, federal laws are subordinate to the Constitution. 93.45.229.98 ( talk) 09:43, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
@ Feoffer it would be much more honest if you explained your changes in the talk. 93.45.229.98 ( talk) 07:06, 15 September 2023 (UTC)